Ribbons Gone Amiss

In 1989, my dad revealed that he was HIV+. Oddly (or perhaps not), his confession came the same year that The Names Project – AIDS Memorial Quilt was touring to several host cities across the US and Canada. It was a surreal time filled with intense emotion and shock.

Along with the quilt display was a memorial ceremony where the names of people who had died from this devastating disease were read in public. My dad asked me to join him in reading names for the ceremony. I accepted.

I am still confounded by my own inner gumption and emotional fortitude to stand alongside him in a public ceremony all the while knowing that some day his own name would be added to and read from that list. Sadly, his journey was short, and in the summer of 1991, my dad finally succumbed to the infections that had ravaged his body.

Why talk about this 23 years later? And what does it have to do with ribbons?

From an early age, I had a passion for tackling injustices. Not that death is an injustice, necessarily. In fact, it is a moment that we all have to face sooner or later. But the injustices surrounding his death (HIV+ and gay) were what propelled me to look deeper into the dark corners of humanity — or rather, into the eyes of fear and loathing.

In the months following his death, I decided that I would take my own experiences and put them to work as an educator and public speaker. It’s amazing to me that while grieving my own loss, that HIV+ artist Patrick O’Connell and a group called the Visual Aids Artists Caucus were hard at work developing the now iconic Red Ribbon Project.

The symbol was created to bring awareness to the AIDS epidemic and to express compassion and support for people living with AIDS as well as their caregivers. I also view the ribbon as a symbol of hope and memory for those grieving the loss of loved ones. It remains a powerful symbol that became the harbinger of the “cause marketing” we have seen for charities ever since from the pink ribbons for breast cancer to the blue ribbons for child abuse.

The red ribbon has a strong personal connection for me, obviously. However, I also know the power this simple iconic gesture has evoked collectively. The red ribbon was a “flag ship” that brought global awareness and political advocacy to a disease that had provoked an immense amount of fear and loathing. The beauty of this billowing red gesture is in how eloquently it transformed this fear and hate into a message of compassion, positive action and love.

So, where am I going with this?

Let’s spin the clock forward to 2013. Much has changed in how we’ve consumed and used media since the 1990s. What was once a more responsible use of journalism and public protest (or opinion) has been turned on its head through the onslaught of social media (often used anonymously) and an increase in sleazy reality and tabloid TV.

Talk about spotted couches!

Now people can sit with potato chips and pop in front of their television and computer screens letting their own fears and prejudices be aroused into frenzied hate mobs, public bullying and irrational posturing or posting.

In fact, the internet through social media like Facebook and Twitter have taken the use of symbolic or public imagery and opinion to a whole other level — one that can be either greatly empowering or threatening and defamatory.

In 1997, Canadian artist, Shelley Ouellet, crafted a beautifully conceived Quilt sculpture made entirely of a rainbow of ribbons used since the early 90s to promote causes.

“Quilt is based on research into the language of lapel ribbon campaigns in the mid 1990’s. A palette of ten colours was developed to represent more than 100 different ribbon campaigns. Many campaigns shared colours with seemingly opposing forces and aside from the AIDS red ribbon campaign, the symbolism of the ribbon colour was not universally shared by any other organizations at the time.”

The piece is a brilliant and monumental eulogy that speaks to the power of our collective conscience and to the positivity of using popular symbols or iconography to impassion the masses to take positive action or support social causes.

Still wondering where I am going with this?

I was moved to write this article because of my own recent obsession with a high profile Death Penalty trial in the US that has provoked very disparate and disparaging opinions (to say the least). During this trial, both the family and friends of the victim, Travis Alexander, and defendant, Jodi Arias, sported ribbons to represent their particular causes on clothing or through the public use of on line avatars. But there is a vast distinction between the two uses of these ribbons. I will also say that I am not convinced that wearing ribbons in the courtroom was an appropriate venue for showing sympathy or remembrance. A court of law is a place where such biases are supposed to be minimized and not flaunted on lapels for the jury to emote or ponder upon.

In the case of the defendant, the ribbon worn by the family was the Purple Ribbon Campaign for Domestic Violence and Abuse. This also highlights one of the controversies of the case whereby those who want “Justice4Travis” have refused to accept or believe that Jodi Arias may have suffered verbal, emotional and sexual abuse at the hands of the victim, Travis Alexander.

In contrast to this Internationally recognized symbol, is the Blue Ribbon “campaign” crafted specifically for “Justice4Travis.” Along with family and friends it was massively promoted by a swarm of public supporters who never met the Alexander family (or even Travis), and only learned about this case through mass media. And in particular, as represented through the salacious and biased “reporting” of the infamous tabloid pundits of HLNTV, Nancy Grace, Dr. Drew, Vinnie Politan et al.

Now let me be clear. I do not believe that Travis Alexander deserved to die , nor in such a brutal way, or that Jodi Arias should not be held accountable for her actions. It’s a tragedy for everyone involved and my heart goes out to all of their family and friends.

But, I am gravely disturbed by the use of a “blue ribbon campaign” to not only amass huge public support during a criminal trial, but to do so with a non-sequestered jury — and then use that ribbon to incite (and encourage) mass intimidation, threats or harassment of witnesses, jurors, lawyers and public citizens who have criticized the fairness of the trial.

It is an insult to causes that affect people on a mass scale and work to promote compassion, positive action and an educated awareness. Within the context of my own experiences, I find this “blue ribbon campaign” to be an offensive use of a collective symbol that has typically brought positive messages to social causes. If the ribbon had been used to bring greater awareness of the plight of victims, then I am sure I would feel quite differently. But sadly, long after this trial, I will not be looking at Blue Ribbons with thoughts or feelings of hope and positivity. Instead, I will be reminded of a public hate campaign that was stirred into a frenzy of cyber bullying and the vilification of the “defendants” — and all of this in the name of justice! What a shame.

So, for me, this “ribbons gone amiss” article ends as a very sad commentary on the maligned use of popular culture, art as advocacy and the freedom of speech that I hold so dearly as an artist, writer and global citizen.

I would love to read your comments — so please, just hit the comment link and talk away. Thank you!

Excellent post! Thank you for sharing your story bout your father. I’m terribly sorry for what happened. Society still has not progressed are enough, but I couldn’t imagine the hardships he endured in an era when intolerance was even greater.

Additionally, I think it’s pathetic that politicians held back research on HIV / AIDS for years, perhaps decades, due to their refusal to talk about something they perceived as a “gay plague” at the time. Their refusal to acknowledge HIV / AIDS as an epidemic limited funding for research, which set research back for too long of a time. Who knows how many lives could have been saved if these politicians would have done the right thing back then?

About the ribbons, yes, this new blue ribbon is ridiculous. How can so many people who, like you said, never knew either Jodi or Travis, become so sensational about this? Who in their right mind would celebrate the first degree murder conviction of this woman? This isn’t “closure”, which is a myth. This doesn’t bring back the victim. This is about two things.

First, it’s about a false sense of revenge — again, for someone they didn’t know. They’re using the vague term “justice” as a masquerade for what it really is — “revenge”. But why do these people want revenge? This leads me to my second point. Somehow, people feel a sense of self-importance — as if they’re a part of something special with the masses. It’s like they feel they “fit in” with a crowd — the lynch mob created by the sensationalistic media.

Lastly, why does “revenge” have to be potentially murdering the convicted? Why would people hug, cry, light fireworks, and celebrate the potential murdering of a convicted woman? What is wrong with our culture’s ethos that we celebrate such a barbaric and antiquated form of revenge?

Whether it’s an advancement in our levels of tolerance, or whether it’s ridding ourselves of this revenge-lynch-mob mentality, I can only hope that the citizens of the world progress in a more positive and civil direction.

Yes, I think in the early days that Reagan failed miserably on that count, and most ironically, Margaret Thatcher despite her major conservatism set the bar for the preventative, safer sex approach. In fact, her shift to a condom based public health campaign in the UK resulted in the less total deaths by the end of the 90s than either Paris or New York.

Your thoughts on revenge versus justice is a salient point. I think it reiterates what I was attempting to express, which is to contrast a campaign of compassion rather than a campaign of hate. Surely, there are enough lessons historically for us to be more enlightened citizens of the world. Though I suspect that both in Canada and the US that our prison and legal system has not kept pace with that ethic or philosophy.

Lovely, beautifully written.
So many have come to think that caring or compassion for one person or
group of people automatically means that one must spew hate and loathing
for those who caused the suffering and by extension, for those who attempt
to understand the perpetrator and refrain from joining the condemnatory mob.
People have developed the twisted notion that if you don’t hate the
perpetrator it means you approve of what they did, so you yourself merit
condemnation.
Apart from sadness over this primitive idea of what constitutes morality
and values, I despair that so many seem to lack the intellectual skills to
be able to see the idiocy in their simplistic reasoning. It seems that
popular culture has bashed people’s thinking to a mush so that certain
parts of their brains, particularly those associated with lateral and
abstract thinking and complex moral reasoning are not being used anymore.
In a few generations these diminutions in brain use will have thoroughly
infiltrated the gene pool.
How sad that what started as a symbol of tolerance, embracing, truth and
casting aside of fear and stigma should now be used to reject alternative
experiences, to try to suppress truth, to attack those who say things that
make others uncomfortable or feel they are losing control, and to label
certain people arbitrarily in order to discredit them and divert people
away from the messages they are giving with no agenda except that the
complete truth be known.
Let’s hope the red ribbon is never requisitioned for such toxic purposes!

Beautifully stated, Pitchforks. It is a huge conundrum this idea of hating the perpetrator without seeking a deeper understanding. I think ultimately that it’s fear — but fear is a baser instinct — our lizard brain so to speak.

I found this great quote by Seth Godin:(of all people!). He uses it to talk about overcoming the fear of being an entrepreneur or “making something happen” — but I think it is an apt point for this discussion.

“The lizard brain is hungry, scared, angry, and horny.

The lizard brain only wants to eat and be safe.

The lizard brain will fight (to the death) if it has to, but would rather run away. It likes a vendetta and has no trouble getting angry.

The lizard brain cares what everyone else thinks, because status in the tribe is essential to its survival.”

I really enjoyed reading this article. You put your heart and soul into this. I especially agree with the ribbons, how they have been used, or misused, and how the judge allowed them in court to sway the jury. She knew that would happen and I feel that she did it with that intention. As time went on her bias became so very obvious and at the end when she read the verdict, that was it. The looks she would give Jodi, the way she allowed the prosecutor to carry on with his theatrics and histrionics was almost unbearable. I bet she wore a blue ‘Justice for Travis’ ribbon under her robe.

What I really liked about your article is how you showed the reasons and relevance for ribbons before you got to the message you were sending. Very well written and thought provoking. 🙂

Laughed at the thought of the Judge Sherry Stephens wearing a blue ribbon under her robe. If she didn’t do it literally, I think she most definitely wore it figuratively.

I thought Judge Belvin Perry’s recent “coming out” about his perceptions of Casey Anthony to be QUITE revealing about the biases that judges do have despite the idea that they we hold them up as impartial. I think he navigated his biases and controlled his courtroom with much greater impartiality, but his interview on TV (during the beginning week of non-sequestered deliberations during the Arias trial!) spoke volumes!

My next essay will be on a Canadian victim of judge’s bias — Nyki Kish. People who are unfamiliar with her case will be stunned at how a judge came to convict an innocent person of Murder Two using “circumstantial identification” from a very flawed and complicated web of witness testimony (which has a very high error rate).

You’ve been on my radar, to speak, for awhile. As I knew you had important things to say and a way to say them. Bravo!

Your story illustrates how this simple symbol that has long stood for the very real, very definable suffering of so many has been hijacked for the hate and revenge campaign orchestrated by such an ugly group of bloodthirsty ego and profit-driven predators.

So many of us have been affected personally by the tragedy of Jodi Arias and Travis Alexander, because of our own experiences of hurt and loss, and even love. I believe this is where the authentic voices of yourself and many other good writers has come from.

That said, I sense the helium seeking from those balloons, as more and more truth comes out. I have compassion for the Alexanders and Travis’ true and real friends for their loss. But I believe in justice, complete justice that includes complete truth and that is not thwarted by fear and intimidation.

So Lissa, thank you for your story. I look forward to the revealing of more of that inner gumption of yours in the future!

Thanks Sandra! I am thinking about what you wrote here and also pondering the quote you just posted on your facebook page from Jeff Hughes’ twitter, which most oddly refers to the people who have focused on seeking the truth about this case despite the mountain of resistance from the aforementioned camp:

“Truth follows 3 stages. First it is ridiculed [um, yup] … Then it is violently opposed [ya, think?] … Then it is accepted as self-evident.” [one can hope].”

He is credited with one of the most famous opening lines of philosophy: “The world is my representation.”

So, what happens to “that” world when it is represented through the will of HLNTV or a media focused on profits not truth? He also talked a lot about art and aesthetics:

“Human desiring, “willing,” and craving cause suffering or pain. A temporary way to escape this pain is through aesthetic contemplation … [which] allows one to escape this pain—albeit temporarily … one no longer perceives the world as an object of perception …[but] rather one becomes one with that perception:”one can thus no longer separate the perceiver from the perception.””

Things that make you go … hmmmmmmm. Always amazed at what you manage to dig up and present to interrupt those perceptions Sandra!